Blanket ruling: a Snuggie is not an outfit, and other wacky court decisions

September 2, 2017

Snuggie has won a lawsuit categorizing it as a blanket not an item of garb( for tax purposes ), but its not the first court battle to elicit chuckles

Its official: a Snuggie is not clothing and not just because you appear stupid wearing one.

The blanket with sleeves is a blanket, a US federal court ruled last month.

The Snuggie was dubbed by the Guardian back in 2009 as the astound manner hitting of the recession, and now its had another win, with parent company Allstar Marketing Group successfully suing the United States government.

Of course, the lawsuit isnt just for funny headlines, but instead because the company wanted to change the classification of the item so that it could pay reductions in import tariffs, noted the Washington Post, which first reported the case.

Imported garments, aka garment, get a 14.9% tariff, while imported blankets merely pay 8.5%.

So Allstar filed a suit back in 2013 to claim the Snuggie had been improperly classified, since what kind of apparel doesnt even cover your bum?

The subject merchandise was not intended to be worn by a human when that person is stroll, argued the complaint filed by Allstar.

Apparently strolling isnt defined as taking a step and pouring a kettle, as depicted in the infamous infomercial( only dont spill your cuppa while jumping to the sofa ).

Thats
Thats a wrap: Guardian reporter Emily Rotberg models the surprise manner reached Snuggie in central London. Photograph: Sarah Lee for the Guardian

The US government had tried to argue that the Snuggie was like clerical or ecclesiastical garments and vestments and professional or scholastic garments and robes.

And while the infomercial seemed to show an intergalactic cult made up of only suburban white people, the court didnt suppose the Snuggie counted as a robe because the back is open.

The court detects the subject importation is properly classified as a blanket, reads the United States court of international trade decision filed on 10 February.

Its not the first time that legalese brings the lols.

Back in 1893 the US supreme court ruled that a tomato was a vegetable. Thats because veggies were taxed and fruit was not and John Nix, a make vendor, tried to argue tomatoes should be exempt from tariffs.

Part of the case involved both sides reading out the definitions of various vegetables from the Websters Dictionary, including parsnips, potatoes, peas, eggplant and carrots.

Although botanically a tomato is classified as a fruit, the Merriam-Webster dictionary today defines it as a pulpy berry of a herb and notes it is eaten raw or cooked as a vegetable. No mention of the f-word at all.

Nix lost the case, with the judges ruling tomatoes are veggies in common speech.

In 2003, Rubies Costume Company filed a suit questioning whether Halloween dress such as Cute and Cuddly Clown classified as a newborn attire or a festive article( babies garments were subject to 16.7% in import tariffs, compared to festive articles being duty-free ).

Festive babies aside, the lawsuit was aimed at Rubies contenders, since Rubies was a domestic producer and didnt important pre-made costumes.

The lawsuit involved a big deliberation over the word fancy dress did it mean glamorous and expensive dres or also inexpensive Halloween garbs? The federal tribunal ruled that fancy dress covered Halloween garbs, and Rubies competitors got hit with higher import tariffs.

In 2006, superior court judge Jeffrey Locke ruled that a burrito is not a sandwich. Panera Bread, a bakery coffeehouse chain, had sued the White City Shopping Center in Shrewsbury, Massachusetts, for allowing a Qdoba Mexican Grill to open in the same mall, since they had a clause against another sandwich shop opening.

But a sandwich is not induced with one tortilla, ruled the court.

A sandwich is not commonly understood to include burritos, tacos and quesadillas, which are typically stimulated with a single tortilla and stuffed with a option filling of meat, rice and beans, wrote Locke in his ruling.

The jury is still out on whether a hot dog is a sandwich.

Read more: www.theguardian.com

About the Author

Leave a Comment: